Maybe a hair of a fraction. That’s literally pulling straws.
How would that be a skill issue?
I preform better with the worse vehicle / weapons in your opinion?
THANK GOD SOMEONE WHO SEES THE WORLD AS I DO
1 Like
Okay (just to make it clear, I’m using the SEPv1/SEPv2 in the comparison, but I’ll just say M1A2 since I’m lazy)
M1A2 vs Type 10
Similar mobility. Type 10 wins in firepower, profile and hull down capability, Abrams wins in turret armor and versatility (less overall depression, but better gun handling and no need to use the clunky suspension). Neither are especially survivable.
M1A2 is still the better tank, but it’s not a massive gap.
M1A2 vs Leclerc
M1A2 vs Leclerc: Similar mobility and firepower is a sidegrade (M1A2 has more pen, but 5 seconds autoloader beats 5 second manual loader any day). Leclerc is smaller profile but weaker turret armor while the Abrams is larger but has better turret armor. Again, neither has much survivability to write home about.
Same as above, the M1A2 still comes out on top but it’s not a big gap.
M1A2 vs Merkava Mk.4
M1A2 has slightly better forward mobility, Merkava has considerably better reverse mobility. Firepower is pretty much equal. M1A2 has more consistent turret armor while the Merkava has better overall survivability.
These tanks are really really close (just a shame that the Spyder is so bad it makes playing Israel 12.7 a pain)
M1A2 vs CR2
(still unlocking the BN and 2E, so most of my experience is with the CR2/CR2 OES/CR3 TD)
M1A2 beats the BN in terms of mobility and firepower. The CR2s get a slight boost in survivability due to the spall liners and no turret basket. BN has the APS which is incredible at longer ranges.
CR2E is closer to the M1A2 in mobility, but loses the APS.
First comparison where the M1A2 is better with a considerable gap
These are the most comparable tanks to the M1A2s. I’m not even going to waste my time comparing the M1A2 to the Ariete AMV, T-90M and T-72B3A, as these 3 are obviously much worse than the M1A2.
1 Like
Not my ariete!
1 Like
So then the russian top tier round, first found at 11.0 , is the same round found at 12.7, which pales in comparison to the americans who get a 600 flat pen round at 10.3?
what is your point.
scuse me what? xD
the A1 beats 3BM60 quite easily?
-
it’s 600 flat pen to 347 angle pen at 60 degrees.
-
3BM60 only has 580 flat pen and 335 angle pen.
Again why are you lying
3BM60 is substantially worse than the M829A1 never mind the A2 which is literally the highest penning round when fired out of an L/44 caliber cannon (aka barrel length, DM53 out the leopard 2a5, 2pl etc all have lower penetration, only out of the A6 and A7 variant do they get the higher pen).
Where did I say that’s all the wolfpack has going for it? I said about the Sprut having 3BM60 was about all it has going for it as it’s pathetic in mostly every other regard, bar maybe thermal imager quality.
The 10.3 with M829A1 doesn’t count for you or what?
might I add with a five second aced reload, at 10.3.
WIth one of the highest penning rounds in game lol.
the leopard 2A4 holds up extremely well in uptiers wtf are you on about? xD it’s one and only draw back is it’s DM23 if it had DM33 or DM43 it would instantly be 11.0 if not higher.
it’s a fantastic tank, 7th most mobile in the game if we use @CAS_is_Bаlаnced chart, which yes I critiqued but it’s still better than anything else we have seen.
You’ve got a 23 percent win rate with the M1KVT mate, you don’t know how to use some of hte best vehicles in their respective BRs.
Also mysterious that somehow, the tanks you claim are inferior are actually the ones you do the best with lol, the Leopards are Br for BR some of the best tnaks in the game, with the 10.7 2A4 being literally the best 10.7 in the game. The thing can roll easily with 11.3s with it’s current set up and smash them.
Even before hand with the 7.1 second reload it was a good tank for giving access to thermals, Okay optics as well as pretty nice mobility, compared to the T72s you would be saddled with otherwise.
because it’s a better tank than the T72B and B 1989, it blows the T72AV out the water bar in thermal imager quality as well as.
Especially now it has the 6 second reload it’s a menace if usedright.
I knwo it does, I use an F16A for CAS and A 15C standard for CAP if the 15C is good for cap then the E and C GE are better.
Granted the M1A2 is genuinely up there top 3 I’d say, we also have to remember for some odd reason the M1A2 standard sits at 12.0 xD rather than a respectable 12.3 where it should be.
2 Likes
Oh yeah I agree that the Abrams is definitely top 3. However I don’t fully agree with Morvran’s claim that the gap between the Abrams and 2A7/122 is smaller than the gap between the Type 10/Leclerc/Merkava Mk.4 and Abrams.
Ideally we would get at least 13.3 for the 2A7/122s alone (pending more counterparts), than we get 13.0 where some of the stronger 12.7s can move to like the SEPv1/SEPv2 etc, the M1A2 could then move to 12.7 as is, the M1A1 HCs lose M829A2 for M829A1 and move to 12.3, M1A1 moves to 12.0 and the IPM1 moves to 11.7.
They could use one of the M1E1 prototypes to fill the 11.0-11.3 hole. It’s pretty much a base M1 hull+turret but wirh the 120mm, which they could give M829 for balance. Either 11.0 with a 6 second reload or 11.3 with a 5 second reload.
1 Like
The most reasonable response I’ve seen in a good while that mate. The BR’s of the abrams are just so compact for no reason, like the M1A1 HC having M829A2 I get is historical but they use ammo to balance (hence why SHIR2 didn’t get L23A1, then went to that bracket anyway).
Agreed, I’d genuinely like to see more older variations of these MBTs, to fill gaps, they’ve forced themselves into a corner with the BRs’ we have and the damn moderness of said vehicles, to the point we’re literally having , as an example, the challanger 3 TD in the game, a tech demo for a tank which hadn’t at that point even been accepted into service.
Oh a wee caveat for @Mach_3_Hamster , I’m an averagely skilled player overall, with monthly stats showing a 1.36KD and a 58 percent winrate.
the T80BVM is one of my worst performing top tier MBTs shown on statshark. Not great but gives a great idea.
1 Like
I retested everything, here is the updated chart. All done on cargo port’s highway.
2 Likes
that looks more like it mate.
leopard became 5th on that list.
Thanking you, even outdoing the most mobile russian MBTs by what, 7 places ?
also
Like to add the concession of our previous talk on mobility, to say the T80UD is mobile compared to it’s T72 peers at 10.3, which was supposed to be the original point. Not compared to the Nato counterparts.
1 Like
I see.
1 Like
I think russian tanks are solid middle of the pack tanks, but I get the frustration with them they absolutely feel like the most inconsistent when it comes to the damage they take. That and everybody is kind of balanced around the russian mbts as they can’t really get anything all that much better, and everybody else’s tanks can get a lot better.
is this article about challenger 2? Didn’t think so.
So?
Multiple top tier MBTs can be easily one shotted, even by considerably lower BR vehicles and the Abrams isnt special doesnt matter because the thread is only about how US and USSR mains are bad at the game?
Please stay on topic. This isnt about every other…
Ok…I’ve just tested your theory and debunked it. I have destroyed 3 or 4 abrams now targeting the ufp with my bmpt between the seam…then doing small circles around it not to hit the drivers port! It works! Maybe 20 shots or so, but it does.
I see. However, in-game, this would not work as you would likely get shot.
not if you easily take out the barrel first. bmpt does this easily. It’s broken and needs fixed.
It’s always ironic seeing you call other nation mains bad when you can barely make the challys work.
4 Likes
I find it funny that you always attack me instead of actually contesting my point . So thanks for agreeing with me that the Abrams is good and maybe US mains are just bad at the game
There really was nothing to contest in that reply. Yes US mains are bad like all the other major nations, however you are just another example of minor nation mains not always being better than major nation mains.
Don’t get me wrong, I seriously respect your opinion on air topics, especially when it comes to British planes. However your opinions on overall top tier ground balance and the performance of non-British ground vehicles is clouded by limited skill and nation main bias, and it’s becoming incredibly obvious.
1 Like